Eric Kow writes: > Darcs needs to be able to work with standard Git repositories
+1 Indeed. A standard hunk darcs-patch can be expressed efficiently (enough, in smallish repos) as a pair of git-tree objects. A token-replace patch would require additional information (a git-note), but that could be automatically propagated with cherry-picks. The fact of a cherry-pick could be represented as a git-note, actually two, one for the source commit and one for the target commit. If this were done automatically, the transitive closure would compute an equivalence relation. That by itself opens up a lot of possibilities. However, for doing darcsy stuff, you'd really want the patches themselves. Interestingly enough, in a packed format repo, *most* versions are represented as patches IIUC. I think you will find that for efficiency Darcs will need to evolve the "standard git format", but it would be a big win if the darcs-git format were upward compatible with the standard git format, and the addition of needed information could be done lazily. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
